Actually I wanted to +1 the "let's get other OSS projects to use Log4j 2" part. I still think many people aren't even aware that Log4j 2 exists or when they do they dismiss it as too new, can't be stable yet. Talks and articles _will_ help.
Remko On Sunday, 3 July 2016, Remko Popma <remko.po...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Sent from my iPhone > > On 2016/07/03, at 5:01, Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com > <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','ralph.go...@dslextreme.com');>> wrote: > > Personally, I don’t think talks do all that much. Articles are great, but > IMO the best route is in trying to get other open source projects to use > Log4j. > > +1 > > Then people who start to use those other projects are forced to learn > about Log4j. > > Ralph > > On Jul 2, 2016, at 12:15 PM, Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com > <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','boa...@gmail.com');>> wrote: > > If we could get a talk in to something big like JavaOne, that might help > adoption, though I have no idea what kind of talks they accept from > non-Oracle people (if any). > > On 2 July 2016 at 08:57, Remko Popma <remko.po...@gmail.com > <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','remko.po...@gmail.com');>> wrote: > >> >> >> On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 11:52 PM, Remko Popma <remko.po...@gmail.com >> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','remko.po...@gmail.com');>> wrote: >> >>> In spite of the fact that Log4j 2 has a very compelling story in terms >>> of feature set and performance, I get the impression that adoption is quite >>> slow. I could be wrong, but how many open source projects use Log4j 2? Or >>> even how many Apache projects? >>> >>> I propose we try to generate some ideas about what we can do to increase >>> our uptake. Some things I've been thinking about: >>> >>> * Rewrite the Wikipedia page on Log4j >>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Log4j>. It's mostly about Log4j 1.2 and >>> mentions Log4j 2 at the bottom in a footnote. That needs to be the other >>> way around in my opinion. The Wikipedia Java logging framework >>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Java_logging_framework> page is even >>> worse. >>> * The Apache Logging site <https://logging.apache.org/> has no explicit >>> mention that Log4j 1 is EOL. >>> >> I updated the Apache Logging page to mention that Log4j 1 is EOL. >> >> >>> * Only the top page on the Log4j 1 site >>> <https://logging.apache.org/log4j/1.2/> mentions that the project is >>> EOL, but it does so in two modest sentences that don't visually stick out >>> and are easily ignored. At the very least the download page needs a mention >>> of the EOL and a link to the Log4j 2 project, but it may be good to have a >>> notification on every page. >>> >> I added the EOL announcement to the top of all main pages in the Log4j 1 >> site. >> >> >>> * Can we get other people involved in evangelizing log4j 2? It would be >>> great if we can make more people enthusiastic so they write blog posts or >>> tutorials etc about Log4j 2. >>> * How can we incentivise people to convert their project to Log4j 2? >>> Maybe start a page on Projects Using Log4j 2 and mention people who did the >>> conversion by name? Or some other way? >>> >>> Thoughts? >>> >>> Remko >>> >> >> > > > -- > Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com > <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','boa...@gmail.com');>> > > >
